You've never worked for the government, have you ? It shows.
Believe, my lemming friend, and try to use those critical thinking skills every once in a while. The feds can hardly even define "really important", and certainly have a hard time keeping track of their own doings. Breaking into federal networks can't be too difficult, it's done all the time. This guy wasn't that good- he's been caught.
I have worked (do, actually) for the government. The really good stuff is not accessible from the public internet, period.
I freely and publically admit to being one of the people who said that no way would Apple be that stupid. I was wrong- Apple was that stupid.
When Apple does not die as a result of this, I trust that at some point you'll be as open and honest as you are now and admit that in retrospect it was you who were that stupid, and not Apple.
The absolute batshit freakin loconess of the article should hardly come as a surprise to anyone, given its source: Indymedia. This sort of thing is de rigeur there, though usually the screeds are more political in nature.
Anyway, I got a good chuckle at the basic premise, $220 computer from India is going to be the beginning of the end for MS? Geez, you can buy a full up PC with monitor for hardly more than that from Dell today. Nice try, guys.
I have my PC for years - I just upgrade as I can afford to (which isn't much or often). A Mac can't be kept reasonably update for £100 (~$175) a year - a PC can. If I move completely over to Linux (as I've been planning for about 5 years - damn games) then it would probably cost even less. Don't get me wrong OSX is nice but I can't afford even a quarter of a Mac Mini let alone anything else.
That's a red herring, since you don't need to keep a Mac "reasonably update" every year. You buy a Mac, and that machine is good to go for years.
How very insightful. Of course it costs less. Luxpro didn't have to sink loads of money into design and advertising, as Apple did, instead they just used Apple's designs and even advertisements free of charge.
You know, after already reading about a hundred "it's a dupe" responses, I'm damn glad you chimed in with "it's a dupe." People might not have noticed the story was a dupe, otherwise.
If by "much better PC" you mean a PC with a CPU that runs more clock cycles, you are right. If by "much better PC" a PC that is a better computer for the same price, you are wrong.
Sure, I'll take your point. But that invalidates the grandparent post's point; the common man could also care less that the Dell has this or that much more clock cycles in the CPU, or whatever. He will see a computer that is made by those cool guys who made his iPod and looks just as cool compared to some clunky Dell that's 6 times as big. That wil sell plenty of Mini Macs.
I picked up an iPod the other day and I found that its USB and Firewire connectivity on PCs to be iffy at best. I couldn't get Firewire to work at all, most of the time when iTunes tries to connect to the iPod, it causes a fatal system error and I have to reboot XPpro. I haven't had trouble with any other devices using these ports so I have to assume the PC version of iTunes has some glitches that create problems with some PC configurations.
Not sure what's so informative about that. I, too, have an iPod that I connect over Firewire to my PC and it works flawlessly, and has for a year without a single problem. Perhaps you should increase your sample size before making assumptions about the PC version of iTunes?
Sadly, RTFA will never get in the way of the hysterical 16 year olds, who seem to make up the majority of the membership here, out to stick it to the (US) Man. It's always 6 degrees of BushHitler - mention any problem, real or perceived, on this planet and these yo-yos will somehow find GWB at the end of it, everytime.
The Beatles can go pound sand
on
Beatles vs Apple
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
but seriously, Steve and Woz made a bad call when the named their company Apple.
Why? Only the most bloody-minded greedhead would ever confuse Apple Corps the Beatles' bloody management company and Apple Computer Corporation. Does Apple Corps offer any products, anything at all I could possibly confuse with an Apple Computer product? I hadn't even heard Apple Corps until this story (what a corny name, btw).
The bad move Steve made was doing a deal with them in the first place, instead of telling Sir Paul and the rest of the living Beatles to piss up a rope. This is really pathetic, and seriously lowers my view of these characters in the first place. When it comes right down to it, the (remaining) Beatles are just a bunch of money-grubbing greed junkies like so many others in the entertainment industry.
I voted with my wallet and changed cell phone carriers to T-Mobile. Over a year ago, I wanted a bluetooth phone for a variety of reasons, but was locked into a Verizon contract and Verizon didn't have the phones. I was told they were on the way, and waited patiently until last month when they finally got them in. I am on a family plan with them with my fiance, and she has the primary phone; Verizon told me that since I was the secondary phone, it would cost me the full $400+ to upgrade my phone to the V710 (as opposed to $250 for her). I informed the sales staff that if I could get the phone for the $250 price, I'd stay their customer for several more years to come, and that the remaining monthly cost of my half of the contract plus the cost of a new T-Mobile account, plus the cost of a T-Mobile BT phone still comes out to less than half of what they want me to pay, what's my incentive to buy the bloody thing for $400? They wouldn't deal, I told the salesman to put the V710 where the sun don't shine, went across the street to T-Mobile and signed up for a new account (and paid my fiance the $100 to cover my share of the contract until it runs out in February).
Now this, Verizon has gimped their BT phones anyway. Makes me feel better for ditching them, the skeeving bastards. In any case my fiance is going to drop them in February and come over to T-Mobile, we've also had a lot of billing problems with Verizon.
If this info was available on replicants and Deckard seemed strangely unnatural then how did he get hired to serve in a critical police force? I'd assume that they'd go over his past with a fine-toothed comb before hiring him and they would have found the truth about Deckard.
The police know he's a replicant - he's their replicant, their tool - but they must hide that fact from the public. The theory is that it is Gaff who is Deckard's controller. Gaff is always shadowing Deckard's activities, always in the background with a knowing smirk. The clincher is Gaff's origamis at key moments. He'll make an origami that corresponds to what Deckard is thinking, such as making the origami of a man with an erection when Rachel comes up as a subject in a conversation, and especially the unicorn origami. In the Director's Cut, Deckard has an inexplicable dream of a unicorn, and later Gaff leaves a unicorn origami for him. This shows that Gaff knows about his dream - Deckard is likely a replicant like Rachel, with implanted memories, and Gaff as his controller, knows what these memories are (also note Deckard's excessive collection of family photos...). Deckard does Gaff's dirty work for him, without knowing it.
If he is a replicant, why is he so much weaker than the others, especially if he designed as a replicant killer?
I can think of a couple of reasons. First of all, in an age of firearms, you ultimately don't need much strength to kill someone else, all you need to be able to do is shoot straight. Which Deckard clearly can do, so long as his fingers don't get broken. Considering that your quarry is extremely difficult to differentiate from the populace at large, the key attribute to getting replicants "aired out" is not physical strength and stamina, but excellent detective work. Where Deckard apparently excels.
By the nature of the job, a Blade Runner has to be able to move freely and have considerable police powers, this is something that the society would never tolerate a replicant having. Also, replicants are banned on Earth anyway. If Deckard obviously possessed superhuman strength and stamina, it wouldn't take long before people figured out that he was a replicant. So, he's got to resemble normal humans a little more closely in order to be effective.
Early in the movie when Bryant the police superintendant is showing Deckard the videos of the replicants, you'll note that there is some text that appears next to their faces and in addition to name and incept date, they seem to be rated in strength, stamina, and intelligence (or something close related to those, can't remember exactly now). It appears that there is variation amongst the Nexus 6 replicants in their abilities, so it's not a stretch to believe that Deckard's abilities could be quite a bit different than the others if his job required it.
I recall that in the US, the Supreme Court has afforded protection to journalists who intentionally broke security laws to protect the public interest. For example, I seem to remember that in the pre-9/11 days, it was ok for a journalist to try and sneak a gun past the security checkpoints, as long as they didn't ever board a plane.
That sounds very dubious to me. Do you have a source for that?
What's not to understand? They broke the law, the police will take care of the consequences of that up to the trial. Then it's for the lawyers, jury and judge to figure out.
If you think this is a bunch of UC Berkeley students doing moderation, I'd like you to find just about any article on Slashdot about global warming -- or nearly anything which has the temerity to suggest that government regulation may be better at protecting the environment than an unencumbered, for-profit market is -- and compare it with anything from a northern California environmental group. See all those similarities? Of course you don't! THEY'RE NOT THERE!
Then maybe you ought to actually read the comments posted instead of just look at the article headlines. Your statement is so off it is simply nuts, and with your low slash ID, you should be ashamed of yourself. I'll just name one recent story: the one about the ODU Maglev. The comments there were full of slams against greedy Americans, greedy American companies, and fat greedy Americans who simply must drive SUVs all over the place instead of take environment-friendly public transport. Hardly views that characterize libertarian politics. Plenty of earth-friendly eco-babble in those comments too. I can't count how many Slashdot stories where I've seen the comments take that route. Of course, when you implore someone to take off their partisan blinders, then launch into an anti-Right tirade, I can see where you might have trouble noticing all this.
What they needed in this, and many other anti-trust cases, is to think outside the box: why not use the RICO statutes? What not have the Federal Trade Commission declare Microsoft OS defective and pull it from shelves? Why not go after Bill and Steve like they did with Enron's Skilling and Lay?
I think Bob is a good at prognosticating, but seriously, every time he starts talking BUSINESS he simply misses the point.
No, he's right on the point. Cringely is laying out the case how Microsoft in the current legal environment always comes out ahead, no matter what. Your ideas about going after MS are all fine and well, but Cringely is not outlining new scenarios to take down Microsoft, he's making a point about the inadequacy of current legal tools to punish bad business practices by companies like Microsoft. And he concludes that until the situation changes, Microsoft won't. That was the point - not to fantasize about misapplying existing law to get Microsoft.
Many voices speaking the same message can make one loud sound.
Yeah, a big loud "queef."
Did you read the article? The point of it was that with the state of business legal systems in the US and Europe - and we can infer that the same probably goes for Japan - Microsoft comes out ahead no matter the legal sanction. Japan can pile on too, it simply won't matter.
Re:I thought I would do this...
on
WB Cancels Angel
·
· Score: 1
(*By the way, read up on Saigo Takamori some time, the guy Last Samurai was vaguely based on; his troops used guns. There was a kamikaze group in the earlier Boshin war who fought with katana against rifles and cannons, but they were mopped up pretty damned guickly.)
That's hardly surprising, as guns were in use in Japan since the 16th century. Musketry played a role in ending the warring states period and establishing the Shogunate. Nothing anti-Samurai about firearms, it was far more the organizational nature of modern armies and the attendant changes in society to support one that the Samurai were against.
Slashdot Mirror
You've never worked for the government, have you ? It shows. Believe, my lemming friend, and try to use those critical thinking skills every once in a while. The feds can hardly even define "really important", and certainly have a hard time keeping track of their own doings. Breaking into federal networks can't be too difficult, it's done all the time. This guy wasn't that good- he's been caught.
I have worked (do, actually) for the government. The really good stuff is not accessible from the public internet, period.
I freely and publically admit to being one of the people who said that no way would Apple be that stupid. I was wrong- Apple was that stupid.
When Apple does not die as a result of this, I trust that at some point you'll be as open and honest as you are now and admit that in retrospect it was you who were that stupid, and not Apple.
The absolute batshit freakin loconess of the article should hardly come as a surprise to anyone, given its source: Indymedia. This sort of thing is de rigeur there, though usually the screeds are more political in nature.
Anyway, I got a good chuckle at the basic premise, $220 computer from India is going to be the beginning of the end for MS? Geez, you can buy a full up PC with monitor for hardly more than that from Dell today. Nice try, guys.
I have my PC for years - I just upgrade as I can afford to (which isn't much or often). A Mac can't be kept reasonably update for £100 (~$175) a year - a PC can. If I move completely over to Linux (as I've been planning for about 5 years - damn games) then it would probably cost even less. Don't get me wrong OSX is nice but I can't afford even a quarter of a Mac Mini let alone anything else.
That's a red herring, since you don't need to keep a Mac "reasonably update" every year. You buy a Mac, and that machine is good to go for years.
At least Microsoft will have the sense to make it load fast and without crashing innumerably...
You're joking, right?
A very large portion of this country is dangerously psychotic.
As your hateful, disgusting screed demonstrates.
I wish I had 10 dollars a day for lunch.
That's the problem with those of us that oppose Bush. We are poor.
Mmmhmmm. I'm sure it has a lot to do with how the Democrats raised about as much money as the Republicans in this election.
And that's not even counting 527 money, which the Democrats raised more of than the Republicans by a factor of about 10.
How very insightful. Of course it costs less. Luxpro didn't have to sink loads of money into design and advertising, as Apple did, instead they just used Apple's designs and even advertisements free of charge.
You know, after already reading about a hundred "it's a dupe" responses, I'm damn glad you chimed in with "it's a dupe." People might not have noticed the story was a dupe, otherwise.
If by "much better PC" you mean a PC with a CPU that runs more clock cycles, you are right. If by "much better PC" a PC that is a better computer for the same price, you are wrong.
Sure, I'll take your point. But that invalidates the grandparent post's point; the common man could also care less that the Dell has this or that much more clock cycles in the CPU, or whatever. He will see a computer that is made by those cool guys who made his iPod and looks just as cool compared to some clunky Dell that's 6 times as big. That wil sell plenty of Mini Macs.
I picked up an iPod the other day and I found that its USB and Firewire connectivity on PCs to be iffy at best. I couldn't get Firewire to work at all, most of the time when iTunes tries to connect to the iPod, it causes a fatal system error and I have to reboot XPpro. I haven't had trouble with any other devices using these ports so I have to assume the PC version of iTunes has some glitches that create problems with some PC configurations.
Not sure what's so informative about that. I, too, have an iPod that I connect over Firewire to my PC and it works flawlessly, and has for a year without a single problem. Perhaps you should increase your sample size before making assumptions about the PC version of iTunes?
Sadly, RTFA will never get in the way of the hysterical 16 year olds, who seem to make up the majority of the membership here, out to stick it to the (US) Man. It's always 6 degrees of BushHitler - mention any problem, real or perceived, on this planet and these yo-yos will somehow find GWB at the end of it, everytime.
but seriously, Steve and Woz made a bad call when the named their company Apple.
Why? Only the most bloody-minded greedhead would ever confuse Apple Corps the Beatles' bloody management company and Apple Computer Corporation. Does Apple Corps offer any products, anything at all I could possibly confuse with an Apple Computer product? I hadn't even heard Apple Corps until this story (what a corny name, btw).
The bad move Steve made was doing a deal with them in the first place, instead of telling Sir Paul and the rest of the living Beatles to piss up a rope. This is really pathetic, and seriously lowers my view of these characters in the first place. When it comes right down to it, the (remaining) Beatles are just a bunch of money-grubbing greed junkies like so many others in the entertainment industry.
I voted with my wallet and changed cell phone carriers to T-Mobile. Over a year ago, I wanted a bluetooth phone for a variety of reasons, but was locked into a Verizon contract and Verizon didn't have the phones. I was told they were on the way, and waited patiently until last month when they finally got them in. I am on a family plan with them with my fiance, and she has the primary phone; Verizon told me that since I was the secondary phone, it would cost me the full $400+ to upgrade my phone to the V710 (as opposed to $250 for her). I informed the sales staff that if I could get the phone for the $250 price, I'd stay their customer for several more years to come, and that the remaining monthly cost of my half of the contract plus the cost of a new T-Mobile account, plus the cost of a T-Mobile BT phone still comes out to less than half of what they want me to pay, what's my incentive to buy the bloody thing for $400? They wouldn't deal, I told the salesman to put the V710 where the sun don't shine, went across the street to T-Mobile and signed up for a new account (and paid my fiance the $100 to cover my share of the contract until it runs out in February).
Now this, Verizon has gimped their BT phones anyway. Makes me feel better for ditching them, the skeeving bastards. In any case my fiance is going to drop them in February and come over to T-Mobile, we've also had a lot of billing problems with Verizon.
If this info was available on replicants and Deckard seemed strangely unnatural then how did he get hired to serve in a critical police force? I'd assume that they'd go over his past with a fine-toothed comb before hiring him and they would have found the truth about Deckard.
The police know he's a replicant - he's their replicant, their tool - but they must hide that fact from the public. The theory is that it is Gaff who is Deckard's controller. Gaff is always shadowing Deckard's activities, always in the background with a knowing smirk. The clincher is Gaff's origamis at key moments. He'll make an origami that corresponds to what Deckard is thinking, such as making the origami of a man with an erection when Rachel comes up as a subject in a conversation, and especially the unicorn origami. In the Director's Cut, Deckard has an inexplicable dream of a unicorn, and later Gaff leaves a unicorn origami for him. This shows that Gaff knows about his dream - Deckard is likely a replicant like Rachel, with implanted memories, and Gaff as his controller, knows what these memories are (also note Deckard's excessive collection of family photos...). Deckard does Gaff's dirty work for him, without knowing it.
If he is a replicant, why is he so much weaker than the others, especially if he designed as a replicant killer?
I can think of a couple of reasons. First of all, in an age of firearms, you ultimately don't need much strength to kill someone else, all you need to be able to do is shoot straight. Which Deckard clearly can do, so long as his fingers don't get broken. Considering that your quarry is extremely difficult to differentiate from the populace at large, the key attribute to getting replicants "aired out" is not physical strength and stamina, but excellent detective work. Where Deckard apparently excels.
By the nature of the job, a Blade Runner has to be able to move freely and have considerable police powers, this is something that the society would never tolerate a replicant having. Also, replicants are banned on Earth anyway. If Deckard obviously possessed superhuman strength and stamina, it wouldn't take long before people figured out that he was a replicant. So, he's got to resemble normal humans a little more closely in order to be effective.
Early in the movie when Bryant the police superintendant is showing Deckard the videos of the replicants, you'll note that there is some text that appears next to their faces and in addition to name and incept date, they seem to be rated in strength, stamina, and intelligence (or something close related to those, can't remember exactly now). It appears that there is variation amongst the Nexus 6 replicants in their abilities, so it's not a stretch to believe that Deckard's abilities could be quite a bit different than the others if his job required it.
I recall that in the US, the Supreme Court has afforded protection to journalists who intentionally broke security laws to protect the public interest. For example, I seem to remember that in the pre-9/11 days, it was ok for a journalist to try and sneak a gun past the security checkpoints, as long as they didn't ever board a plane.
That sounds very dubious to me. Do you have a source for that?
What's not to understand? They broke the law, the police will take care of the consequences of that up to the trial. Then it's for the lawyers, jury and judge to figure out.
Dennis Miller turned conservative? I've never seen a more hateful, less funny "comedian" ever.
I have - Al Franken.
If you think this is a bunch of UC Berkeley students doing moderation, I'd like you to find just about any article on Slashdot about global warming -- or nearly anything which has the temerity to suggest that government regulation may be better at protecting the environment than an unencumbered, for-profit market is -- and compare it with anything from a northern California environmental group. See all those similarities? Of course you don't! THEY'RE NOT THERE!
Then maybe you ought to actually read the comments posted instead of just look at the article headlines. Your statement is so off it is simply nuts, and with your low slash ID, you should be ashamed of yourself. I'll just name one recent story: the one about the ODU Maglev. The comments there were full of slams against greedy Americans, greedy American companies, and fat greedy Americans who simply must drive SUVs all over the place instead of take environment-friendly public transport. Hardly views that characterize libertarian politics. Plenty of earth-friendly eco-babble in those comments too. I can't count how many Slashdot stories where I've seen the comments take that route. Of course, when you implore someone to take off their partisan blinders, then launch into an anti-Right tirade, I can see where you might have trouble noticing all this.
Take off your partisan blinders, indeed.
The US is not Europe, or the rest of the world.
No shit, Sherlock. Once again, I ask you: RTFA. Pay special attention to Cringely's remarks on the EU suit against MS.
What they needed in this, and many other anti-trust cases, is to think outside the box: why not use the RICO statutes? What not have the Federal Trade Commission declare Microsoft OS defective and pull it from shelves? Why not go after Bill and Steve like they did with Enron's Skilling and Lay?
I think Bob is a good at prognosticating, but seriously, every time he starts talking BUSINESS he simply misses the point.
No, he's right on the point. Cringely is laying out the case how Microsoft in the current legal environment always comes out ahead, no matter what. Your ideas about going after MS are all fine and well, but Cringely is not outlining new scenarios to take down Microsoft, he's making a point about the inadequacy of current legal tools to punish bad business practices by companies like Microsoft. And he concludes that until the situation changes, Microsoft won't. That was the point - not to fantasize about misapplying existing law to get Microsoft.
Many voices speaking the same message can make one loud sound.
Yeah, a big loud "queef."
Did you read the article? The point of it was that with the state of business legal systems in the US and Europe - and we can infer that the same probably goes for Japan - Microsoft comes out ahead no matter the legal sanction. Japan can pile on too, it simply won't matter.
(*By the way, read up on Saigo Takamori some time, the guy Last Samurai was vaguely based on; his troops used guns. There was a kamikaze group in the earlier Boshin war who fought with katana against rifles and cannons, but they were mopped up pretty damned guickly.)
That's hardly surprising, as guns were in use in Japan since the 16th century. Musketry played a role in ending the warring states period and establishing the Shogunate. Nothing anti-Samurai about firearms, it was far more the organizational nature of modern armies and the attendant changes in society to support one that the Samurai were against.